MON Airports vs. MON VORs and More

Reader feedback and questions from past issues of IFR. We read em all and try to answer most e-mail, but it can take a month or more. Please be sure to include your full name and location. Contact us at IFR@BelvoirPubs.com.

Editorial Staff

Monday, April 11, 2016 at 12:00 AM ET

Verified

Key Takeaways:

The future MON (Minimum Operational Network) will repurpose remaining VORs and airways primarily to guide IFR aircraft to designated MON airports, not necessarily to VORs on those airports, as Victor airways largely disappear.
ADS-B systems (and associated transponders) are generally meant to be on continuously while the aircraft is powered, though ATC may still issue "squawk standby" instructions for specific operational reasons.
Pilots can address inconvenient ATC procedures or charting errors by contacting relevant facilities (starting locally and escalating), ideally presenting a collective case, while always being polite and remembering "unable" for safety.
Modern GPS and moving map technology offers significant advantages in situational awareness, but pilots must remain actively engaged in the flight to avoid complacency and leverage these tools effectively.

See a mistake? Contact us.

MON Airports vs. MON VORs

Reading the sidebar to Fred Simonds’ February article “GPS Backup Strategies” about the MON, I wonder if Victor airways will disappear when the FAA decides that GPS is the primary means of navigation in the NAS. I get that when satellite navigation goes dark the priority is to get all airborne IFR flights on the ground somewhere—anywhere—so wouldn’t pilot action be to tune the nearest MON airport and fly direct (if above 5000 feet AGL) and fly a published ILS or VOR approach from an IAF with no need to follow an airway to get there?

Your articles make my subscription to IFR worth the investment.